FNH Five Seven 1.6lb gun

It would be okay for varmints and small game, if that was desired.

For personal protection, it's much lower on the list. The round was designed for full-auto submachine gun use, not one-round hits. It's not much of a stopper.
You could do as well with any .22 magnum, which is basically all it is.

Definitely a lot better than nothing, but not my first choice in defensive hardware. Nice quality gun though, and would do the job.

I think I'd prefer a Pac Lite ultralight upper for the Ruger .22 pistol instead, or the Cricket .22 rifle with the Ruta Locura carbon fiber kit on it.
Good for procuring small game in the wild for food, and enough of a deterrent for defense if that was ever needed.

How much does it cost?

The cheapest i've ever seen it is $799, the average is $899-$900.

For self-defense, a Keltec PF-9 weighs 12.7 oz and shoots 9mm. That's as light as you can get for something with stopping power. It usually runs for $300-350.

For game, I agree, a .22LR would be more practical.

My brother shot the five seven, he says it's a really cool gun to shoot, though.

self defense requires a big bullet, with stopping power, that makes a big wound.
accuracy outside of about 25 ft is also irrelevant

I dont know much of anything about guns, but am thinking about taking some classes and learning all i can about about concealed carrying. Could someone explain to me why stopping power is so important? I know that if your in a position that your actually shooting at someone, your shooting to kill. But it the real world, isnt the deterant of having a gun pointed at you and then being shot, even though it may not be a critical wound, enough to stop most human threats from advancing? Just wondering what the stats on these types of occasions are?

No, a gun is NOT a deterrent to some.

Especially perpetrators on drugs, with lots at stake, or maybe just hyped up anyway.

Small caliber bullets at moderate velocities dont do squat immediately, unless hit vital systems . Your life may depend on stopping an assailant NOW, with one shot.

You can shoot a 5 lb rabbit with a .22, and the bullet can pass thru it, even a lowly rabbit can still run away. It will die, but not till it runs off and hides.

not a big gun guru…but if stopping power is what you are after you prob also want a high pressure hollow point (not sure who does them now but stuff like +p+ hydrashok or like the old black talons or whatnot)

so i would consider a gun slightly heavier (glock26 maybe) that can handle it

YMMV

North American Arms sells ~5 oz. .22 cal revolvers.

That is very light. It's an odd round, though. Weird ammo tends to have availability issues. Here's a simple test: can you buy it at Big 5, or in the sporting goods store in Lone Pine, California?

Either way, for outback use I think such a small round isn't valuable for protection (see "stopping power" discussion above, also known as "whack") and the short barrel isn't useful for accuracy, at all. It means nothing that the ammo will go 100 yards at speed (a .22LR is accurate to the size of a dime at 100 yards) when the barrel is that short.

If one needs to hunt/survive, the Henry (nee Armalite) .22LR Survival Rifle is 2.5lb, waterproof when broken down and is pretty easy to accurize. If one needs stopping power to take on wolves, escaped Presa Canarias or domestic terrorists, go for diameter on them bullets.

For all around use, I would agree with a .22.

For ultralight concealed carry/personal defense, you may want a revolver over a semiauto pistol. Greater reliability, simplicity, no magazines, etc.

Perhaps a Smith & Wesson 342PD. From a recent review: "…the lightest of the Centennial series, weighing a feathery 10.8 ounces. Smith & Wesson has pioneered the use of titanium alloys in its revolvers, resulting in weapons that are much easier to carry concealed, without sacrificing strength. Titanium, when compared to steel, is lighter, tougher, and absolutely rust-proof. The 342PD is over four ounces lighter than the aluminum-frame/steel cylinder 442, and three-quarters of a pound lighter than the stainless steel model 640. In a pocket gun, every ounce counts, and the 342PD is the lightest concealed-hammer .38 Special revolver you can buy. Only the S&W 337PD exposed-hammer Chief’s Special is lighter, by one-tenth of an ounce."

Plus pepper spray and a knife…

I'm a gun person of the first order, but I can't really conceive of a circumstance that would prompt me to carry that hiking or backpacking.

But the comments about it's effectiveness as a "stopper" are mildly amusing. Nidal Hasan killed 13 people and wounded 29 others at Ft Hood with this gun and cartridge.

And as to the question about guns being a deterrent – they deter crime about a thousand times for every circumstance they are actually used. But, one shouldn’t carry a gun without being prepared and proficient in its use. Some people, and MOST predator animal species, don’t bluff real well.

Diego,

I suggest you visit glocktalk forums. It has a great sub-forum dedicated to concealed carry with many knowledgeable contributors including police officers.

But to make a quick follow up to your post, stopping power is absolutely necessary because if you have to use a firearm lawfully for the purpose of self defence, you must be in immediate danger of death or physical harm. Therefore, you will unholster your weapon with the intent to immediately discharge it to the assailant's centre of mass – the heart cavity area. You want the bad guy drop before he can reach to you even while (s)he is wounded, and possibly deliver a fatal stab. This is a tough thing to get, and once you understand this point, it will help you make up your mind whether carrying a firearm for self defence is something you are mentally prepared to do.

Pulling a gun out without an immediate intent to use it in hopes to deter an attack will probably, in most jurisdictions, fall into the category of unlawful brandishing of a weapon.

Kind regards,
Gregg

If I were to carry (can't in Canada) it would be a Glock 29SF. Very light and small for what it is (24 oz) – it fires the 10mm round. One decently placed shot of the higher-grain ammo will drop a grizzly if need be. I know this is a bit weird, but as this is BPL, I would prefer to think of such an item as being multi-use (for both human and large animal predators).

I know bear-spray is a much better option most of the time (it's what I actually carry, anyway). But a 29SF is the lightest thing going that could get you out the other side of any conceivable attack by any conceivable land animal or human on earth, and then another one, and then another one.

People often confuse bullet diameter with "stopping power," but in this case, the FN 5.7 x 28mm is far more powerful than a rim-fire .22 magnum. Developed to meet a NATO requirement for a replacement to the 9 x 19mm pistol/SMG round, the FN 5.7 has been proven in testing to be capable of penetrating body armor, and pistols chambered for this caliber are used by law enforcement agencies and military units throughout the world.

Any doubt as to the 5.7's human-killing potential was probably dispelled by the massacre at Fort Hood. Major Nidal Malik Hasan used a 5.7 pistol to kill 13 and wound a further 29.

"For personal protection, it's much lower on the list. The round was designed for full-auto submachine gun use, not one-round hits. It's not much of a stopper."

Tell that to the victims of MAJ Hasan.

…

The FN is certainly an interesting model, and I’d done some research on it a while back. The question of stopping power has certainly been debated.

The pros are largely:
1. Relatively light (617g, add another 127g for a 20 round magazine.)
2. Very low muzzle flip / recoil
3. Decent penetration with tumbling (Some examples here, scroll down for the pork shoulder.)
4. Capacity (see item 1)

Cons:
1. Cost may be high for some. But if you’re buying Patagonia/Arc’teryx?
2. Availability of ammunition.
3. The really fun ammo is not available to civilians.

Armchair assessment (emphasis on the “armchair”):
Those who’ve shot it are usually very impressed with the accuracy and low muzzle flip. If you’re engaging multiple targets at longer distances, this and the magazine capacity will be a very useful thing. (It will also be less tiring.)

In a backpacking context, using Rodger’s examples, it would probably be very effective. The large magazine capacity and accuracy count very much in its favor. The Pulp Fiction reference is quite apt, I think.

I would never use this FN as a defensive firearm unless I knew I would be defending myself against assailants wearing kevlar vests. But then, if this is your prospect, you should be changing your life. Over-penetration is a huge concern. Defensive round should create a large temporary cavity as it enters a body, and then fragment creating collateral wounds that bleed profusely causing the host to drop from rapid change in blood pressure and shock. That round MUST stay inside of the body it enters lest it hits a bystander on its way out.

I am sure it is a great weapon for other applications such as hunting or just general plinking. The incident at Fort Hood only shows that this is an effective assault round capable of killing many people located at short to medium distance from the muzzle. Defensive weapons need to do what I described at a short distance.

I know we are getting really deep into the subject now.

My fishing buddy – ex-cop, ex-military – points out that, domestically, more people are killed with a .22 than anything else.

I know it is because .22s are widespread, cheap, and concealable rather than because it is an ideal defensive (or offensive) round but that doesn't make those thousands of people any less dead.

For use for backpacking, I would imagine that the percentage of times a gun is used while backpacking is to scare animals away or kill them if they are attacking you rather than a drug induced human attack. For this reason, I would say that gun would do the trick for most everything but a bear (and even then if they are not that serious and hear the noise of the gun). I wholehardedly support getting out of an animal's way rather than shooting them however.. after all we are in their back yard not the other way around.

I have taken gun safety courses in my attempt to get a concealed weapon license. I got to the second to last course and was told of the extra complications would arise if I ever had to use the weapon in terms of proving I had no choice but to use deadly force. The burden of proof is much harder for a person with a conceal license… so much so that even though I paid for the course, I did not attain my license as their seemed to be too many ways a prosecutor could imprison me if for whatever reason they decided what I did was somehow illegal vs someone that did not have the conceal permit.

…

"No one would ever suggest ditching a first aid kit."

Roger: I would. While we were "packed for bear", medically, for a 16-day Colorado River trip (serious drugs, trauma supplies, two MDs), the raft floats however much stuff you put in it.

But for backpacking: I'd much rather a companion had first-aid knowledge than gear, creativity than every size of bandaid (e.g. they could be creative with how to use thermarests, tent poles and pack struts as a split rather than have every possible split packed with them).

For bandaids/dressings/splits, I look to whether I have the knife, scissors, needle/thread to create that from other gear. Drugs are another issue and those I DO bring a careful selection of.

Back to guns: Someone with extensive knowledge of local plants, and how to snare/fish could gather more calories more easily than the most skilled marksmen so in that realm I also go for knowledge over gear. But I'll grant that for stopping a human with criminal intent, a firearm can do things that a psych degree can't. I know it is only partial true, but I like to think I've left those people behind when I've left the pavement.

the FN 5.7 was designed around NATO's need for a light, high capacity round sidearm that was capable of longer distance shooting than the current NATO 9mm, also high on the list was the ability for it to penetrate body armor and have a long gun that would utilize the same cartridge

this is a battlefield designed weapon, I don't see much use for it in the civilian world to be honest

I do have a somewhat scary story about this weapon/cartridge- I was working a night shift heading out w/ another warden to look for spotlighters, we made it about 3 miles out when the radio lit up about a shooting in town w/ the suspect still at large. the individual had shot (and ultimately killed) his ex-girlfriend and severely wounded her companion. the suspect had riddled their vehicle as they departed, the penetration of the vehicle by this round was scary!

we helped the local PD for a couple of hours, first securing the scene and then looking for the suspect in town (w/ no luck)

we then left for our spotlight patrol and after awhile letting the shooting incident fade and concentrating on the task at hand I was driving and could see a vehicle pulled off the side of a county gravel road facing us, nothing highly unusual, but this about midnight so not normal

as we neared the vehicle, I had a bad feeling and it was confirmed when I could see the truck and part of the plate that matched the suspects- I floored it and ducked down, wincing as the image of the vehicle he shot came into my mind

we got clear of the vehicle and radioed in that we found the suspects vehicle, as it was two deputies from a neighboring county were just down the road- we made a quick plan and headed back towards the suspect. he must of knew something was up and took off, what we didn't know is that he used to live in this rural area and knew the back roads very well- not a comforting thought

we spent the entire night searching for the vehicle (it was very spooky every time we saw another vehicle that night), at morning light we found his vehicle, advanced on the vehicle to find him dead from a self inflicted wound

probably not very germane to the discussion, but that night/morning still is very vivid in my mind

carry on :)